The Bivings Report - powered by the Bivings Group

Last week, I wrote a post about Georgetown University’s process for redesigning its website.  As I drafted the piece, I developed a working thesis that university websites are sort of like government sites, in that they have to do so much and serve so many audiences that the designs end up being utilitarian and bland.  This lead me to spend a few hours going through the websites of the 100 best universities in the country, as ranked by U.S. News and World Reports, in an effort to prove my theory. 

Turns out I was wrong.  It turns out that despite all that they have to accomplish, lots and lots of universities have produced websites that are both beautiful, and immensely usable. 

Following is a list of the 11 best best designed websites from the U.S. News World Reports list, as judged by me with input from some of my co-workers here at The Bivings Group.  Please note that I only looked at the top 100 on the list – I’m sure there are websites from schools outside the top 100 that are equally impressive.

Take a look, and let me know what you think in your comments.

(11) Virginia Tech

I like the look and feel here a lot, as well as the use of photography.  It isn’t higher on the list because it is just a little too busy for my tastes.

(more…)

As most of you may know, this Sunday is the 82^nd Academy Awards.  While I’m not happy with some of the retro changes (let’s be honest and say that the ten Best Pic nominees could’ve been whittled down to four films, including one that was completely overlooked, The Informant) we’ll see in this weekend’s ceremony, I thought it was worth pointing out some new social media promotion tactics the Academy is trying out this year.

For the first time, the Oscars will broadcast red carpet coverage online, thanks to their partnership with Facebook, and will give users like you a chance to ask your favorite actor a question.  According to their page:

“We know you’re used to seeing stars at the Academy Awards®, but now for the very first time you can get involved! Oscar.com has partnered with Facebook to bring you Oscar.com Live from the Red Carpet, a very special online pre-show that allows you to watch the stars walk the Red Carpet and answer questions from fans like you. Yes, you read that right!

Join hosts Lisa Guerrero and Brett Chukerman as they cover all the action unfolding outside the Kodak Theater. Using your Facebook account, you can send a message to them on the Red Carpet, and they’ll pass along the best questions and comments in real time to the stars that sashay by. But that’s not all! Rico Rodriguez (Manny from the ABC hit comedy Modern Family) will also be on hand to meet and interview fans in attendance, as they experience all the glitz and glamour right from the Red Carpet.”

For viewers who like options and have either Facebook or Twitter log-ins, they can go to APLive and see streaming coverage there as well.   APLive is also making this available on their Facebook page, but users will have to become a fan in order to see the coverage, so it’ll be interesting to see if the 1,373 fans of the page jumps to a significantly higher number over the weekend** (See update).   This streaming event is the first of many for the year-long partnership between APLive and Livestream.

If you really feel like you need more connection to this year’s awards, there are a few iPhone Apps available for download for this (again, let’s be honest) very crowded awards year.   One thing I probably will be checking out this weekend is Adam Shankman’s Twitter feed, one of the two being promoted on Oscar.com.

I don’t want to sound pessimistic or snobby.  There were some great films this year and I’ll take a moment to throw out my top picks for Best Picture:

1. Up (Pixar just knows how to pull at the heartstrings)
2. Inglorious Basterds
3. The Informant (what movie? Netflix it when it comes out later this month)
4. An Education (probably my pick of the year)
5. Honorable Mention: Drag Me to Hell (I’m not being cute here. It really is a great film.)

Update:  We all know the winner’s from last night’s ceremony.  Another Update**: AP Live’s Facebook page now has 7,672 fans.

The Bivings Group has been hard at work developing a new website and online communications strategy for Critical Exposure, the winner of our TBGives philanthropic campaign, which awarded $10,000 of internet consulting to the D.C.-based youth charity.

This week, we were honored with the announcement our efforts have won the Communitas Award for Excellence in Community Service.

We are thrilled to be recognized in the category of Pro Bono work excited to look for ways to expand upon the TBGives campaign in 2010.

Living in DC, I have a lot of friends that went to Georgetown University, and have been a fan of the basketball team since the Patrick Ewing days.  Given my loose ties to the school, I’ve been watching with interest as Georgetown staff blog publicly as they redesign their website, which apparently hasn’t been touched since 2002 (wow).

I really like this stuff, as being in the web development business myself I learn a lot by reading about how other firms approach things like user research, card sorting, wire frames and defining information architecture.   I also think the transparency of sharing updates on progress is refreshing and healthy.

However, I think things went off the rails a bit when Georgetown started posting the actual comps showing what the new site will look like.  Naturally, after posting the draft designs lots of people weighed in.  And while it seemed like the majority of people preferred one of the options called Clarity (pictured below), the comments were sort of all over the place.  As a result of the disjointed feedback, Georgetown produced a new design in an attempt to respond to some of the criticism that the designs weren’t cutting edge enough.  And this has lead to more opinions.

After reading through the comments, it struck me that asking users for design feedback was probably a mistake, for a few reasons.

• People don’t understand the complexity of the overall site.  There is a reason Georgetown hasn’t changed its site since 2002 – doing so is a massive undertaking.  University sites have to appeal to a number of very diverse audiences (prospective students, students, alumni, faculty, parents, etc.) and have to have sections that adequately represent the university’s various departments and schools.  The information architecture is extremely complicated, and it is nearly impossible for someone not involved in the process to know whether the designs achieve the goals laid out in the discovery process.
• Since most people can’t comment on the site in a substantive way, they focus exclusively on look and feel (colors and typography).  And look and feel is completely subjective.  I personally am a minimalist when it comes to web design, and prefer sites that have a primarily white palette, and which use colors and images judiciously.  That style is not everyone’s cup of tea.  If you ask ten people to comment on a websites look and feel, you’ll probably get ten different opinions.
• People hate change.  While this may not be true of the Georgetown website specifically given its age, every time you redesign a site that is popular and successful there is a backlash.  On the web, design is usability and anytime you disrupt users they will complain, and then forget about it in a few weeks after they adjust.  This concept is demonstrated by every single change every made to sites like Digg and Facebook.

Ultimately, the process of designing a website should not be a democracy.  It is important to understand your users and how they interact with the site, but I’m not sure it is important to hear their opinions on typography and colors.  Some decisions need to be made by a small group of folks behind closed doors.

In all probability, Georgetown is taking all the comments it is getting on the designs with a large grain of salt, and treating the reactions they receive as anecdotes.  And maybe there is some value in that.  However, I suspect posting the actual site designs for public review hasn’t accomplished much at all, beyond perhaps raising the blood pressure of the design team.